First cause

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Listen. What I'm trying to get through to you is this. Your posts are often filled with so many flawed assertions, inconsistencies, half-truths, outright lies, etc. that I don't know where to begin. Should I try to refute them all? Refute some? Even when I attempt to refute some, you seem unable to grasp what is being said. It's as if you're incapable of takes a hit when I point this stuff out to you, but you really need to take a hard look.

You don't get it. These lies and inconsistencies you talk about are just minor things that I just see as pedantry on your part. I'm sure in your mind you have made out me to be a liar of some sort but it's only because you are unbelievably picky about everything. In my opinion you need a severe chill pill. This thread is only a bit of fun really , just finding out where others are on things and playing devil's advocate.

Can you find any instance where I have been inconsistent regarding a core piece of theology or belief (and by that I mean the important stuff). You are too caught up in the chaff to see the wheat. You get distracted by the minor details and miss the big issues. I bet your house is always tidy because it seems you cant stand a bit of messiness. Get real . That's what being human is all about.

It's like you want it all under your control and under your rules before you venture out of your bubble.

Look , if you answer NO to the Holy Spirit question then my line of argument from this will be that the Holy Spirit is key to understanding Jesus (according to his words) and key to guiding us into truth so it punches a hole in your interpretation of Jesus . If you say yes then I will ask you what the Holy Spirit might have been up to after jesus went and who he might have been working through (eg St Paul).

The Holy Spirit question opens out into the issue of truth because it is a key part of jesus's teaching (which you seem such a fan of).

My bone of contention with you has always been how you have tried to suck Jesus into your world view and theology without accepting that he has a world view and theology of his own. You patronise him by saying you are a fan but then you don't really believe in the view of the world he put forward. You are not in for a penny , in for a pound with Jesus. You are not supposed to fit him in to your world view , it's you that fits into his world view. And his world view includes the Holy Spirit

Originally posted by knightmeister
You don't get it. These lies and inconsistencies you talk about are just minor things that I just see as pedantry on your part. I'm sure in your mind you have made out me to be a liar of some sort but it's only because you are unbelievably picky about everything. In my opinion you need a severe chill pill. This thread is only a bit of fun really , just w , it's you that fits into his world view. And his world view includes the Holy Spirit

If you are unable or unwilling to keep track of what is true and what is not true, how are you going to be able to know what truth is? I read what you write and I know that you have no idea what is or isn't true. If God is truth, what do you know of God?

You try to take me to task for putting "Jesus into [my] world view and theology without accepting that he has a world view and theology of his own." But it is you who do so. Jesus says several times and in several different ways that one must overcome sin to be "saved". But in your worldview, all you have to do is profess belief that Jesus died for your sins and perhaps a couple of other minor things. Your worldview all but ignores what Jesus has to say. You instead choose to follow Augustine's interpretations of Paul's interpretations of Jesus instead of the words of Jesus. Your worldview only requires that you be "in for a penny". You aren't willing to be "in for a pound." You aren't willing to give up your self for what is righteous. Is there any wonder that you and "Christians" like you are no more moral than the general population and with many less moral? You make a mockery of the vision of Jesus. If you ever wonder why "Christianity" has such a widespread reputation for hypocrisy, you only need look a far as a mirror.

Look at how you try rationalize your habit of lying. What does Jesus say about liars? That's right, it makes little difference to you. You're only in for a penny anyway. You speak from your own nature.

John 8:44
"You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies."

Originally posted by knightmeister
Don't get me wrong I'm not knocking the concept of distance or time or logic , they are all very valuable ways of making sense of the world. It's when people jump to thinking that these things actually are in the world that I object to.

Actually, you are knocking them, because you are claiming they don't exist.
The problem with your objections, is that you don't seem to be able to explain what you are talking about in an understandable way. I think the real problem is you don't understand the concepts in the first place and thus deny their existence. There is really no point continuing the discussion, if you cant understand something as simple as distance and realize that it is an intrinsic part of the universe and not a figment of your imagination.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually, you are knocking them, because you are claiming they don't exist.
The problem with your objections, is that you don't seem to be able to explain what you are talking about in an understandable way. I think the real problem is you don't understand the concepts in the first place and thus deny their existence. There is really no point continuing ...[text shortened]... d realize that it is an intrinsic part of the universe and not a figment of your imagination.

Saying something is a concept is not to say it is a figment of imagination , it is to place it clearly in the catagory of the mental arena. I am asking the question whether existence is something different from our concepts of existence. A description of something is clearly not the same as the thing it describes.

The problem here is that you think I am saying something I am not.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
If you are unable or unwilling to keep track of what is true and what is not true, how are you going to be able to know what truth is? I read what you write and I know that you have no idea what is or isn't true. If God is truth, what do you know of God?

You try to take me to task for putting "Jesus into [my] world view and theology without accepting t ...[text shortened]... e, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies."

Yes yes I know that's what you think . It's your opinion and you are entitled to it. I could contest it but you are so fixed on your interpretations. You know nothing of my struggle with sin and what I have or haven't given up but I will leave you to your assumptions.

The question is still ----- Do you believe in the Holy Spirit?

Do you even believe in the Devil? (You just quoted Jesus talking about him)

Have you overcome sin 100%?

Do you believe he was ressurected?

(It's impossible to work out what your truth is unless you tell us)

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
If you are unable or unwilling to keep track of what is true and what is not true, how are you going to be able to know what truth is? I read what you write and I know that you have no idea what is or isn't true. If God is truth, what do you know of God?

You try to take me to task for putting "Jesus into [my] world view and theology without accepting t ...[text shortened]... e, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies."

BTW----- Neither of us know that much about each other so where is all this mind reading coming from?

What do you know of my lifestyle? Zilch really. You make all these ideas up in your mind about me based on pedantic little things which you call "ego". You haven't even asked me about my lifestyle.

All I know of you is that you preach a Jesus that is not of the Gospel and is dangerous because of the denial of grace via faith. You also refuse to answer direct questions which seems suspicious. You have also by default implicitly admitted that you have not overcome sin yourself (which leads to me the conclusion that you preach what you cannot practice). Beyond this I don't really know much about you but I have formed opinions based on what you have said.

I fail to see how you have reached some decision on my morality on about 0.0005 % of the information.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Saying something is a concept is not to say it is a figment of imagination , it is to place it clearly in the catagory of the mental arena. I am asking the question whether existence is something different from our concepts of existence. A description of something is clearly not the same as the thing it describes.

The problem here is that you think I am saying something I am not.

Are you, or are you not saying that distance does not exist? Are you or are you not claiming that the distance between you and me is not a factual property of the universe, but is rather a figment of my imagination.
Please clarify, as you appear to be contradicting yourself from post to post.

Either we are separated or we are not. If we are separated then there exists a dimension on which we are at separate points. That dimension has nothing at all to do with your 'mental arena'.

Originally posted by knightmeister
BTW----- Neither of us know that much about each other so where is all this mind reading coming from?

What do you know of my lifestyle? Zilch really. You make all these ideas up in your mind about me based on pedantic little things which you call "ego". You haven't even asked me about my lifestyle.

All I know of you is that you preach a Jesus t ...[text shortened]... see how you have reached some decision on my morality on about 0.0005 % of the information.

You've admitted to being a liar.

You've admitted that you've yet to overcome sin.

You've said that you don't believe the words of Jesus when he repeatedly said that one must overcome sin to be "saved".

No "mind reading" required. No need to know more of your lifestyle.

"...by default implicitly admitted...". I must say you've got quite the sense of humor. If it wasn't meant to be funny, then it's a testimony to just how twisted and illogical your mind is.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
You've admitted to being a liar.

You've admitted that you've yet to overcome sin.

You've said that you don't believe the words of Jesus when he repeatedly said that one must overcome sin to be "saved".

No "mind reading" required. No need to know more of your lifestyle.

"...by default implicitly admitted...". I must say you've got quite the sen to be funny, then it's a testimony to just how twisted and illogical your mind is.

True to form you try every trick in the book in an attempt to gain the moral high ground and I'm unphased as before. The fact that I have not overcome sin 100% may be a big deal for you but for me
it means that I have some way to go on my journey. As you know the correct interpretation of jesus' teachings is what we are debating anyway so your interpretation applies to you not me. Jesus still exhorts me to overcome but not in order to gain salvation because I have that via grace.

It's quite clear that what makes a man hypocritical is whether he can live up to the essence of his OWN beliefs . Therefore the only person accountable to your fake "salvation by works" jesus is you because you dreamt him up. I didn't. I am accountable to the Jesus I believe in. By saying that your interpretation is correct you are just saying "I is right cos I is" I would be nice if you offered a broader and rounder argument based on all of his teachings instead of a few.

So if you wish to pick up on a key belief of mine (eg - how hard do I work to try and live out the love and compassion and forgiveness of christ in my life ) then feel free but keep your fake jesus to yourself. He's a clever copy designed to lead astray. Don't you understand the Devil has done a magnificent job on you? As long as he can keep you believing you have the real rolex you won't see it for the fake it is , and the real Jesus will pass you by.


I don't remember admitting to being a liar (hmm when waas that?)

You did implicitly admit that you had not overcome sin 100% yourself because I asked you once and said I would assume you hadn't unless you told me otherwise. You did nothing to challenge or correct this perception so I feel justified in holding it.

So if you have overcome sin 100% then please tell me all about it . Otherwise I will continue in my assumption that you haven't. You are free to challenge it whenever you like.


Do you believe in the Holy Spirit? (I just copy and paste this now , more in hope than expectation)

Originally posted by knightmeister
True to form you try every trick in the book in an attempt to gain the moral high ground and I'm unphased as before. The fact that I have not overcome sin 100% may be a big deal for you but for me
it means that I have some way to go on my journey. As you know the correct interpretation of jesus' teachings is what we are debating anyway so your int the Holy Spirit? (I just copy and paste this now , more in hope than expectation)

KM: "You did implicitly admit that you had not overcome sin 100% yourself because I asked you once and said I would assume you hadn't unless you told me otherwise. You did nothing to challenge or correct this perception so I feel justified in holding it."

And you wonder why I call you a child. Most people come to recognize the fallacy of this argument some time in their teens. It's just so juvenile.

I'm not even going to bother addressing your usual assortment of half-truths, contradictions, misleading statements, outright lies, etc. It's just not worth it.

You have eyes but cannot see.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Are you, or are you not saying that distance does not exist? Are you or are you not claiming that the distance between you and me is not a factual property of the universe, but is rather a figment of my imagination.
Please clarify, as you appear to be contradicting yourself from post to post.

Either we are separated or we are not. If we are separated ...[text shortened]... h we are at separate points. That dimension has nothing at all to do with your 'mental arena'.

Sorry to say, but the reason KM "appear[s] to be contradicting [himself] from post to post" is because he does. It's remarkable how oblivious he seems to be to it. He seems to talk in circles and alter his beliefs from context to context. He's even managed to make a single statement with contradictory clauses. I don't know if he just likes messing with people, is that illogical, is that dense or some combination of all three. I for one have had enough of his games. Good luck should you decide to continue.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]KM: "You did implicitly admit that you had not overcome sin 100% yourself because I asked you once and said I would assume you hadn't unless you told me otherwise. You did nothing to challenge or correct this perception so I feel justified in holding it."

And you wonder why I call you a child. Most people come to recognize the fallacy of this ...[text shortened]... g statements, outright lies, etc. It's just not worth it.

You have eyes but cannot see.[/b]

And you wonder why I call you a child. Most people come to recognize the fallacy of this argument some time in their teens. It's just so juvenile. ---ToO-----

So you have overcome sin 100% then?

You and I both know that you are utterly determined to never answer the question because it puts you in a difficult position . My son does this and he's years from being a juvenile. He pouts when he does it.

Originally posted by knightmeister
And you wonder why I call you a child. Most people come to recognize the fallacy of this argument some time in their teens. It's just so juvenile. ---ToO-----

So you have overcome sin 100% then?

You and I both know that you are utterly determined to never answer the question because it puts you in a difficult position . My son does this and he's years from being a juvenile. He pouts when he does it.

If I've told you once, I've told you 100 times (unfortunately this is soon coming to the point where it is no longer an exaggeration):

"Whether or not a given individual has overcome sin has absolutely no bearing on what Jesus meant."

You keep trying to squeeze in these ridiculously flawed arguments where you talk around in circles for post after post. Even if you can't see how flawed they are, I can. I see no point in playing that game, so I choose not to answer the question.

Why do you keep pretending like I haven't explained this to you before? Are there any insights into your character that one may glean from this?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
If I've told you once, I've told you 100 times (unfortunately this is soon coming to the point where it is no longer an exaggeration):

"Whether or not a given individual has overcome sin has absolutely no bearing on what Jesus meant."

You keep trying to squeeze in these ridiculously flawed arguments where you talk around in circles for post after p ...[text shortened]... is to you before? Are there any insights into your character that one may glean from this?

And I've also told you 100 times that it has a great bearing on whether you should be taken seriously or not. If the answer is "no" then why should your interpretation of "what Jesus meant" be listened to by anyone?

It would mean that you have no idea what you are talking about because you would have no personal experience of overcoming sin yourself. Therefore you would be talking from a theoretical non-integrated position with no experience to back it up.

I've also told you that "what Jesus meant" is exactly what we are debating and you just treat your interpretation as if it is the only intepretation possible. It's the "I is right cos I is" position.

You ask me to take your position seriously but you can't back it up with anything real from your own life. This means your position is flimsy and also means you cannot afford to open up the debate further because you will be on thin ice. You say you see no point in "playing the game" but we haven't even started because you won't answer any questions. Of course things will go round in circles because you can't/won't take the debate forward. What exactly are you afraid of?

Now, let me repeat , I dispute your interpretation of what Jesus meant so stop treating it as a given.

I doubt whether you believe in the Holy Spirit or even the existence of God as a real entity. You have just latched on to a few quotes and created you own fake rolex out of it all. Your pick and mix theology doesn't wash with me , I can see right through it.

Originally posted by knightmeister
And I've also told you 100 times that it has a great bearing on whether you should be taken seriously or not. If the answer is "no" then why should your interpretation of "what Jesus meant" be listened to by anyone?

It would mean that you have no idea what you are talking about because you would have no personal experience of overcoming sin yoursel ...[text shortened]... Your pick and mix theology doesn't wash with me , I can see right through it.

You really don't get it do you? I mean, it's one thing to make a logically flawed argument. It's another to insist on it even after it's pointed out to you. Even after you've had plenty of time to consider and reconsider.

Reading your last post (actually I could say this about almost every post you make), I could only shake my head in disbelief. Your arguments are not only flawed, they are flawed on so many different levels. You bring to mind a quote by Faulkner:

"Like a man who can't play a tune, blowing his horn right loud, hoping that any minute it'll begin to make music."